Hi,
Bug#820127 is duplicate of Bug#819385
-- Majid Tajamolian
Hi,
I confirm the bug is exist in the last debian testing image (Build
2016-04-18) as yet.
The severity is high.
Majid Tajamolian
Hi,
I confirm the bug is exist in the last debian testing image (Build
2016-04-18) as yet.
The severity is high.
Majid Tajamolian
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 00:13 -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
>> Including missing arm header references from the arm64 headers:
>> asm/opcodes.h:#include <../../arm/include/asm/opcodes.h>
>> asm/xen/hypervisor.h:#include <../../arm/include/asm/x
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:48:51PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 19:15 +, Arthur Gautier wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:00:55 + Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >
> > > Source: linux
> > > Source-Version: 4.5.1-1
> > >
> > > We believe that the bug you reported is fixed i
On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 19:15 +, Arthur Gautier wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:00:55 + Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >
> > Source: linux
> > Source-Version: 4.5.1-1
> >
> > We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
> > linux, which is due to be installed in the Debian
On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 10:10 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:08:54AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:58:31PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > >
> > > On Apr 18, 2016, at 09:40 PM, James McCoy wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I've been seein
Your message dated Tue, 19 Apr 2016 22:28:59 +0100
with message-id <1461101339.28559.34.ca...@decadent.org.uk>
and subject line Re: Bug#816094: Bug does not occur in linux-image-4.5.0-1-amd64
has caused the Debian Bug report #816094,
regarding linux-image-4.4.0-1-amd64: Hangs (crashes ?) under xorg
Processing control commands:
> severity -1 important
Bug #627782 [src:linux] fcntl(F_SETFL, O_APPEND) has no effect on aufs
filesystem
Severity set to 'important' from 'normal'
> tag -1 upstream fixed-upstream patch
Bug #627782 [src:linux] fcntl(F_SETFL, O_APPEND) has no effect on aufs
filesyste
Control: severity -1 important
Control: tag -1 upstream fixed-upstream patch
On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 14:57 +0900, Akihiro Suda wrote:
> The issue is not resolved yet in 3.16.7-ckt20-1+deb8u3 of
> linux-image-3.16.0-4-amd64.
>
> Although I didn't do test with Debian's 3.16 tree yet, the following
> c
On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 00:13 -0300, Ricardo Salveti wrote:
> Including missing arm header references from the arm64 headers:
> asm/opcodes.h:#include <../../arm/include/asm/opcodes.h>
> asm/xen/hypervisor.h:#include <../../arm/include/asm/xen/hypervisor.h>
> asm/xen/page.h:#include <../../arm/includ
Over in https://bugs.debian.org/821400, Ben Hutchings makes the
reasonable suggestion that where possible, when
brcm/brcmfmac43340-sdio.txt (or configuration file for other brcm
chipsets) is not available, brcmfmac_sdio should try looking for
configuration in the efi variables directly.
That would
On Thu, 14 Apr 2016 15:00:55 + Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Source: linux
> Source-Version: 4.5.1-1
>
> We believe that the bug you reported is fixed in the latest version of
> linux, which is due to be installed in the Debian FTP archive.
>
Hello,
As far as I tested, I believe the bug is incorrect
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> reassign 821442 src:linux 4.5.1-1
Bug #821442 [schroot] schroot: union-type overlay broken on linux 4.5
Bug reassigned from package 'schroot' to 'src:linux'.
No longer marked as found in versions schroot/1.6.10-2.
Ignoring request to alter fixed v
On Mon 2016-04-18 18:47:25 -0400, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Ah, I dimly remembered that this information could be stashed in the
> system firmware somewhere. It seems like the driver ought to look
> there first if EFI support is enabled (there is an in-kernel API for
> reading EFI variables). That w
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:08:54AM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:58:31PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > On Apr 18, 2016, at 09:40 PM, James McCoy wrote:
> >
> > >I've been seeing something similar. Am I right to assume that these are
> > >union-type=overlay? If so,
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:58:31PM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Apr 18, 2016, at 09:40 PM, James McCoy wrote:
>
> >I've been seeing something similar. Am I right to assume that these are
> >union-type=overlay? If so, this seems to be a change in the kernel.
>
> Yep, union-type=overlay.
http
On 12-04-16 16:56, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 14:43 +0100, Herman van Rink wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Is anyone working on live kernel patching in Debian?
>>
>> I'm a bit surprised to see so little public speak about such a nice
>> looking feature.
> Not all the necessary infrastructure
This bug does not affect the new package linux-image-4.5.0-1-amd64
(tested version 4.5.1-1).
19 matches
Mail list logo
